TOEFL TPO -1 Writing Task 1 Sample: You will now see a question that asks you to summarize the points made in the lecture and to explain how they cast doubt on points made in the reading passage. If this were an actual TOEFL iBT ® test, you would have 20 minutes to write your response. In this practice test, you may write your response and then compare it to the sample responses. Directions: Give yourself 20 minutes to plan and write your response. Your response is judged on the quality of the writing and on how well it presents the points in the lecture and their relationship to the reading passage. Typically, an effective response will be 150 to 225 words. You may view the reading passage while you respond. Response time: 20 minutes Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on specific points made in the reading passage.

1.Sub Scores Task fulfillment: 4 Organization: 4 Coherence and Cohesion: 4 Language Use: 3

2.Estimated Scores Estimated Score: 25

3.Task completeness The essay does a good job of addressing the specific requirements of the task by summarizing the points made in the lecture and explaining how they cast doubt on the points made in the reading passage. However, there is room for improvement in terms of language use and sentence structure. Some sentences are too long and complex, making it difficult to understand the intended meaning.

Suggestions for improvement:

• Use shorter sentences to convey your ideas more clearly.

• Be mindful of proper grammar and punctuation.

Examples:

1. Instead of "Chevalier’s memoir is a controversial one," consider writing "The Chevalier's memoir has been a subject of controversy."

2. Instead of "So that Chevalier could refer to the notes when he was writing many years after the dialogue," consider writing "This allowed Chevalier to refer to his notes when writing his memoir many years later."

4.Essay structure and organization The essay has a clear structure with an introduction, body, and conclusion. The organization is logical, with each paragraph focusing on a specific point from the lecture and its relationship to the reading passage. However, transitions between ideas could be improved for better coherence.

Suggestions for improvement:

• Use transitional phrases or words to connect ideas more smoothly.

• Make sure each paragraph has a clear topic sentence that introduces its main idea.

Examples:

1. Add transitional phrases like "Firstly," "Secondly," and "Lastly" at the beginning of each paragraph discussing a point from the lecture.

2. Instead of starting a paragraph with "According to the reading material," consider using a topic sentence like "The first point discussed in the lecture challenges critics' claims about Chevalier's wealth."

5. Grammar

Chevalier’s memoir is a controversial one. The reading material shows that some critics question the authenticity of the memoir, while the female professor proves what is recorded in the memoir is true in detail. First of allFirst(first of all (first)), the professor argues that the Chevalier was indeed wealthy, because his assets were tied up in property, not cash. According to the reading material, some critics mention that Chevalier used to borrow money from other people, which means Chevalier was not as wealthy as he wrote in his memoir. However, the professor argues that it is the form of Chevalier’s property that leads to the loan. Chevalier needed to borrow some money until his property was sold for cash. So, borrowing money doesn’t mean Chevalier was poor. Second, the dialogues in the memoir were written based on the records of the day of the conversation, rather than direct recollections during the writing process. The critics believe that it is impossible to remember the details of the dialogues that occurred many years ago, so they complain theto the(This rule identifies whether the preposition 'to' is missing in a sentence.) authenticity of the dialogue content. As evidence to refute, the professor mentions that Chevalier often took notes after the dialogue, and he kept his notes for many years. So that Chevalier could refer to the notes when he was writing many years after the dialogue. Furthermore, there were also witness who could prove that Chevalier often flipped through his notes while writing. Third, the situation and documentation of the prison Chevalier was in can prove that he escaped from the prison ceiling. The critics say escaping from prison from the ceiling is just an attractive way of writing. And they think Chevalier was released from prison by bribing jailers. Contrary to the critics' claims, the professor mentions that there were lots of prisoners who are wealthier than Chevalier but, but(Detects missing comma before "but") they all can’t be released, which means bribing jailers was not feasible. And documents from the prison also implied that the ceiling was repaired after Chevalier escaping from the prison. And the professor thinks it’s strong evidence. All in all, even though the critics argue that the Chevalier's memoir is embellished, the evidence suggests that it holds substantial truth. With these three reasons, the professor successfully counters the arguments presented in the reading material.

6. Revised Essay

Chevalier's memoir has been a subject of controversy, with critics questioning its authenticity. The reading passage highlights these concerns, while the lecture provides evidence supporting the memoir's accuracy.

Firstly, the lecture contends that Chevalier was indeed wealthy, despite having to borrow money. Critics argue that if he were truly wealthy, he would not have needed loans. However, the professor explains that Chevalier's wealth was tied up in property rather than cash, necessitating short-term loans until his assets could be liquidated. Thus, borrowing money does not necessarily indicate a lack of wealth.

Secondly, critics express skepticism about the accuracy of conversations between Chevalier and Voltaire recorded in the memoir, given the time elapsed since their occurrence. The professor counters this by explaining that Chevalier took notes immediately after each conversation and referred to them when writing his memoir years later. Witnesses who lived with Chevalier in his later years confirm that he regularly consulted notes and journals while composing his memoir.

Lastly, critics question Chevalier's account of escaping from a Venetian prison through a hole in the ceiling, suggesting it is more likely that he bribed his jailers for release. The professor refutes this claim by noting that other prisoners with more powerful connections were unable to secure their freedom through bribery. Moreover, old Venetian government documents reveal that repairs were made to the ceiling of Chevalier's prison cell shortly after his escape – lending credibility to his account.

In conclusion, despite critics' arguments against the authenticity of Chevalier's memoir, the evidence presented in the lecture suggests it holds substantial truth. The professor effectively counters each argument raised in the reading passage with well-supported reasoning and evidence. (279 words)

Chevalier’s Chevalier's memoir is has been a controversial one. subject of controversy, with critics questioning its authenticity. The reading material shows that some critics question the authenticity of the memoir, passage highlights these concerns, while the female professor proves what is recorded in the memoir is true in detail. lecture provides evidence supporting the memoir's accuracy (Changed "controversial one" to "subject of controversy" for clarity and better flow).

First of all, the professor argues that the Firstly, the lecture contends that Chevalier was indeed wealthy, because his assets despite having to borrow money. Critics argue that if he were truly wealthy, he would not have needed loans. However, the professor explains that Chevalier's wealth was tied up in property, property rather than cash, necessitating short-term loans until his assets could be liquidated. Thus, borrowing money does not cash. According to the reading material, some necessarily indicate a lack of wealth (Rephrased for clarity and better flow).

Secondly, critics mention that express skepticism about the accuracy of conversations between Chevalier used to borrow money and Voltaire recorded in the memoir, given the time elapsed since their occurrence. The professor counters this by explaining that Chevalier took notes immediately after each conversation and referred to them when writing his memoir years later. Witnesses who lived with Chevalier in his later years confirm that he regularly consulted notes and journals while composing his memoir (Rephrased for clarity and better flow).

Lastly, critics question Chevalier's account of escaping from other people, which means Chevalier was not as wealthy as he wrote in his memoir. However, the professor argues that a Venetian prison through a hole in the ceiling, suggesting it is the form of Chevalier’s property that leads to the loan. Chevalier needed to borrow some money until his property was sold for cash. So, borrowing money doesn’t mean Chevalier was poor. more likely that he bribed his jailers for release. The professor refutes this claim by noting that other prisoners with more powerful connections were unable to secure their freedom through bribery. Moreover, old Venetian government documents reveal that repairs were made to the ceiling of Chevalier's prison cell shortly after his escape – lending credibility to his account (Rephrased for clarity and better flow).

Second, the dialogues in the memoir were written based on the records of the day of the conversation, rather than direct recollections during the writing process. The critics believe that it is impossible to remember the details of the dialogues that occurred many years ago, so they complain In conclusion, despite critics' arguments against the authenticity of the dialogue content. As Chevalier's memoir, the evidence to refute, the professor mentions that Chevalier often took notes after the dialogue, and he kept his notes for many years. So that Chevalier could refer to the notes when he was writing many years after the dialogue. Furthermore, there were also witness who could prove that Chevalier often flipped through his notes while writing. ¶ Third, the situation and documentation of the prison Chevalier was in can prove that he escaped from the prison ceiling. The critics say escaping from prison from the ceiling is just an attractive way of writing. And they think Chevalier was released from prison by bribing jailers. Contrary to the critics' claims, the professor mentions that there were lots of prisoners who are wealthier than Chevalier but they all can’t be released, which means bribing jailers was not feasible. And documents from the prison also implied that the ceiling was repaired after Chevalier escaping from the prison. And the professor thinks it’s strong evidence. ¶ All in all, even though the critics argue that the Chevalier's memoir is embellished, the evidence presented in the lecture suggests that it holds substantial truth. With these three reasons, the The professor successfully effectively counters the arguments presented each argument raised in the reading material.passage with well-supported reasoning and evidence (Rephrased for clarity and better flow).

8. Mind Map

1. Wealth
   a. Critics: Borrowing money
   b. Lecture: Property, not cash

2. Conversations with Voltaire
   a. Critics: Time elapsed
   b. Lecture: Notes, journals, witnesses

3. Prison escape
   a. Critics: Bribery
   b. Lecture: Other prisoners, government documents, ceiling repairs

9.Key Words